Windows 8 leak: an App Store for Windows, IE9 beta in August

A set of slides distributed to Microsoft's PC partners in April of this year has been leaked onto the Internet. The slides outline Microsoft's vision for Windows 8's hardware ecosystem: the form factors the software giant will be targeting, the hardware capabilities that will be offered, and the demands that these parameters will place on OEMs.

A new "Windows Store" is perhaps the most ambitious feature described. Microsoft would offer a store service to third-party software developers. The store would allow easy discoverability of applications both from within Windows and from the Web. The store would handle standard features like account management and software updates, as well as providing capabilities such as the ability to replicate applications and settings across different devices. The store would be curated, so only applications that reached a certain quality standard would be permitted. The basic model, then, is a cross between Apple's App Store and Valve's Steam.

Indications are that such a feature would be well-received. The slides are not the first such communication between Microsoft and its OEM partners; they contain feedback from the first "ecosystem forum" at which the Windows Store concept was apparently first discussed. The slides say that Microsoft's partners believe that a Windows Store "can't happen soon enough," and think that an improved application distribution model, including a unified catalog and purchase experience, is a "critical component" to their success.

The App Store has certainly won many fans on Apple's iOS platform, and similar models have been adopted on both Android and Windows Mobile/Windows Phone. Extending it to a desktop platform is in some ways logical, but thus far efforts to do so have been limited. Steam is successful, but relatively limited in scope, being used for games and game-related material.

Microsoft itself has attempted a broader store—the Microsoft Marketplace, used in conjunction with the Digital Locker for online purchasing of both first- and third-party software—but its efforts were terminated last August. It's therefore a little surprising to see Redmond trying again, and so soon. However, it's probably fair to say that consumers and software vendors alike are now more attuned to the idea of having a centralized store for purchasing applications, and if other problems faced by the Microsoft Marketplace can be resolved (for example, it was not available outside the USA, it was not well-promoted, and it was not well-integrated within the OS), the company's next attempt may yet succeed.

Still no tablet OS in the works

The leaked documents suggest that Redmond still sees no value in creating a dedicated tablet-oriented operating system analogous to Apple's iOS. Microsoft describes three form factors that are particular priorities: slates, laptops, and all-in-one desktops. These form factors are regarded as important because they give OEMs more ability to distinguish and differentiate their products than conventional desktops. To drive home the significance of creating well-designed, attractive products, Microsoft references Apple in many of the slides, highlighting how Cupertino leverages strong industrial design and a consistent experience across its various products.

The decision to equip slate machines with Windows 8 does not, of course, mean that Windows 8 might not be more finger-friendly than Windows 7 presently is, but it does mean that Redmond is still not going to have a platform that can properly compete with the iPad or Android-powered tablets. These low-powered ARM-based devices have no equivalents in the x86 world; if Microsoft wants to target them, it can't do so with Windows 8.

Beyond that, there are many slides that say, in essence, that Windows 8 will be a continuation of Windows 7. Windows 7's (little-used) sensor and location APIs are being heavily promoted. Microsoft's view is that Windows 8 hardware will support a richer range of sensors (GPS, cell-tower positioning, proximity sensors, accelerometers, webcams, not to mention the company's own Kinect), and that there is considerable value to be had from vendors properly integrating these devices into the platform's frameworks.

For its part, Microsoft outlined a few new possibilities that would exploit these sensor capabilities, such as the ability to automatically log on based on a webcam's detection of the user sitting at the keyboard, and then subsequently lock the machine when the user leaves.

In other slides, the software company said that it was continuing to emphasize start-up, shutdown, and restore-from-sleep performance. These areas were performance targets for Windows 7, and that is apparently continuing with Windows 8. This will include a new "Logoff + Hibernate" feature that will act as an accelerated alternative to shutting down.

Though it's possible that dates have slipped since the documents were distributed in April, they also stated that Internet Explorer 9 would have a beta release in August. Further, this beta release would include the full Internet Explorer 9 experience; the threePlatformPreview releases have provided developers with access to the new browser's rendering engine and JavaScript processor, but have included only a rudimentary front-end. This front-end will be revealed in the beta.

Mysteries remain

The most interesting feature of the documents, however, is perhaps how uninteresting they are. Windows 8 is set to be a major release (like Windows Vista/Windows Server 2008, unlike Windows 7/Windows Server 2008 R2), so one might, naively, have expected Redmond to have a lot to say about it.

Instead, the picture painted by the leaked documents is very much an evolutionary one. The use of sensors and the improvements to certain areas of performance are certainly welcome changes, but they're direct continuations of the work already done in Windows 7. A successful application store might be a big deal for software developers, but its direct impact on the operating system is negligible. Windows 8 may well be a major release, but the nature of its major changes remain a mystery.

Microsoft itself has attempted a broader store—the Microsoft Marketplace, used in conjunction with the Digital Locker for online purchasing of both first- and third-party software—but its efforts were terminated last August. It's therefore a little surprising to see Redmond trying again, and so soon. However, it's probably fair to say that consumers and software vendors alike are now more attuned to the idea of having a centralized store for purchasing applications, and if other problems faced by the Microsoft Marketplace can be resolved (for example, it was not available outside the USA, it was not well-promoted, and it was not well-integrated within the OS), the company's next attempt may yet succeed.

Seems to make perfect sense to me why they would try again: it's absolutely critical that they do it, and get it out there as quick as possible. It's even possible that the folks who were working on it got retasked to work on the new store. In addition, the app store on the iOS is quite possibly the biggest selling point for the phone, and if Microsoft can get an app store out before Apple does, they can start making Windows seem 'modern', and actually have a feature that OSX doesn't. (Yet.)

The App store would in an ideal world also include all other features of an app delivery system - auto updates, installation, payment as part of the system. Windows has all of those as APIs right now (well, except maybe payment) but they're hard to use or painful. Or have too many options.

This gives them a chance to simplify the whole windows app install process.

If they do it well, it could allow them to showcase "cool, new applications" and make it much, much easier to discover existing ones. And at a corporate level, it could be used to provide a list of 'already approved' apps - a feature already available with Windows if the IT department set it up, but you have to dive into the control panel to find them.

If Windows has an App Store, they really should allow custom repos. That is the single worst thing about the Apple App store: no third-party repos. This would allow them to keep out of the EU's crosshairs also, I think.

Or that, perhaps the new "features" aren't to be publicized yet to its partners?

A lot of the improvements that go into incremental updates of an operating system are security, look and feel, and lots of technical, behind-the-scenes stuff. For example, Apple's big draw with Snow Leopard was... (yawn) 64-bit compatibility, and I think its draw with Leopard was Spaces? That's all stuff that lives in user-land and might not be relevant (yet) to PC partners.

However, it's a bit sad to see how Microsoft's playing the follower with respect to a "Windows Store". But, even if the idea sounds a bit pathetic, the implementation can easily turn this into a really good feature. One reason why a lot of Linux distributions are fun to use is due to their package management and distribution systems, like apt/RPM.

"Microsoft describes three form factors that are particular priorities: slates, laptops, and all-in-one desktops [...] but it does mean that Redmond is still not going to have a platform that can properly compete with the iPad or Android-powered tablets"

"Microsoft describes three form factors that are particular priorities: slates, laptops, and all-in-one desktops [...] but it does mean that Redmond is still not going to have a platform that can properly compete with the iPad or Android-powered tablets"

I'm kind of confused, aren't slates equivalent to tablets?

Sure. But the iPad weighs under 2 lbs and has a battery life of 10 hours (if not more). You can't do that with x86 (at the moment, at least). It needs ARM. And Windows 7/8 don't run on ARM.

To compete with iPad et al. you need to run on the same kind of hardware. That means an ARM OS with a 100% touch-native UI.

If Windows has an App Store, they really should allow custom repos. That is the single worst thing about the Apple App store: no third-party repos. This would allow them to keep out of the EU's crosshairs also, I think..

I'm sure they will, but make it like Android, where you have to specifically enable installing from outside sources. This will keep 98% of users from hurting themselves.

Oh, and MS, if you're reading this, maybe we can finally get system-wide spell checking (something that Mac users have been enjoying for years), a multi-item clipboard manager, and a file manager with tabs built right into the OS. PLEASE!?!?

"Microsoft describes three form factors that are particular priorities: slates, laptops, and all-in-one desktops [...] but it does mean that Redmond is still not going to have a platform that can properly compete with the iPad or Android-powered tablets"

I'm kind of confused, aren't slates equivalent to tablets?

Sure. But the iPad weighs under 2 lbs and has a battery life of 10 hours (if not more). You can't do that with x86 (at the moment, at least). It needs ARM. And Windows 7/8 don't run on ARM.

To compete with iPad et al. you need to run on the same kind of hardware. That means an ARM OS with a 100% touch-native UI.

Interesting, so Slates = x86 and Tablets = ARM. That's good to know. But what about Intel Atom which is supposed to be a low power processor, how does it compare to ARM-based processors in terms of power consumption?

Funny how people were screaming bloody murder when another article suggested Apple would have an App Store, but nothing here.

That being said, I doubt MSFT allows custom repos. I might have missed it while skimming the Ars article, but the CNET article on this seemed to indicate that the marketplace will actually be administered by the hardware manufacturer.

Thats a pretty big deal, IMO. If MSFT offers something similar to Windows Phone builders, (i.e. they take a cut of the Marketplace profits) it might help them unseat Android too.

It's actually something needed, and something I look forward to. As long as I can install 3rd party stuff through the web, I have no problem with yet another download service. I love Steam, and from what I can tell, this is basically the same thing, though I would venture to say, more tightly integrated.

"Microsoft describes three form factors that are particular priorities: slates, laptops, and all-in-one desktops [...] but it does mean that Redmond is still not going to have a platform that can properly compete with the iPad or Android-powered tablets"

I'm kind of confused, aren't slates equivalent to tablets?

Sure. But the iPad weighs under 2 lbs and has a battery life of 10 hours (if not more). You can't do that with x86 (at the moment, at least). It needs ARM. And Windows 7/8 don't run on ARM.

To compete with iPad et al. you need to run on the same kind of hardware. That means an ARM OS with a 100% touch-native UI.

Interesting, so Slates = x86 and Tablets = ARM. That's good to know. But what about Intel Atom which is supposed to be a low power processor, how does it compare to ARM-based processors in terms of power consumption?

Eh? I was under the impression that a tablet had a keyboard, but a slate did not.

Hercules wrote:

Cool. Apt-Get for Windows.

It's actually something needed, and something I look forward to. As long as I can install 3rd party stuff through the web, I have no problem with yet another download service. I love Steam, and from what I can tell, this is basically the same thing, though I would venture to say, more tightly integrated.

"Microsoft describes three form factors that are particular priorities: slates, laptops, and all-in-one desktops [...] but it does mean that Redmond is still not going to have a platform that can properly compete with the iPad or Android-powered tablets"

I'm kind of confused, aren't slates equivalent to tablets?

Sure. But the iPad weighs under 2 lbs and has a battery life of 10 hours (if not more). You can't do that with x86 (at the moment, at least). It needs ARM. And Windows 7/8 don't run on ARM.

To compete with iPad et al. you need to run on the same kind of hardware. That means an ARM OS with a 100% touch-native UI.

Not so sure on your definition of slate vs tablet. Intel's new atom platforms will be x86 and relatively comparable in battery life. They're not as powerful as current x86 but are intruding on ARM territory in efficiency.

On a separate note, is there any good articles explaining x86 and ARM architecture and their difference performance results?

Microsoft itself has attempted a broader store—the Microsoft Marketplace, used in conjunction with the Digital Locker for online purchasing of both first- and third-party software—but its efforts were terminated last August.

And here we have the exact reason why I would never buy most PC software via digital download. Is software that was purchased from the Microsoft Marketplace still usable? Still installable on a new or reformatted system? In my mind, software that has any online DRM or activation is worth no more than $5 or $10. I'm pretty sure I can get my money's worth from those apps before someone decides to shut down an online DRM or activation server. But "real" PC applications? Can I get $500 worth of use from Office 2010 Professional, or even $250 worth from Office Home, before MS decides to pull an MSN Music and shut down the required servers?

Interesting, so Slates = x86 and Tablets = ARM. That's good to know. But what about Intel Atom which is supposed to be a low power processor, how does it compare to ARM-based processors in terms of power consumption?

I wasn't saying that; slate and tablet are functionally identical.

At the moment, nothing Intel has can touch ARM systems for power consumption.

That being said, I doubt MSFT allows custom repos. I might have missed it while skimming the Ars article, but the CNET article on this seemed to indicate that the marketplace will actually be administered by the hardware manufacturer.

Thats a pretty big deal, IMO. If MSFT offers something similar to Windows Phone builders, (i.e. they take a cut of the Marketplace profits) it might help them unseat Android too.

I really, really hope they don't do this for Windows Phone because if they do, it will kill any development I had planned for WP. If I would have to deal with every separate hardware manufacturer there is no way I could do it as a single hobby-developer. Apple's and Google's stores both allow me to deal with one single entity for distributing apps which is exactly how I want it (and both companies are used to international devs as well).

Funny how people were screaming bloody murder when another article suggested Apple would have an App Store, but nothing here.

No, the problem was that if Apple introduced an App Store for OSX, they would probably make it over time *replace* other methods, due to Apple's desire to Make it Simple. Unfortunately, Make it Simple usually requires its evil brother, Do It Our Way, which people hate.

That being said, I doubt MSFT allows custom repos. I might have missed it while skimming the Ars article, but the CNET article on this seemed to indicate that the marketplace will actually be administered by the hardware manufacturer.

Thats a pretty big deal, IMO. If MSFT offers something similar to Windows Phone builders, (i.e. they take a cut of the Marketplace profits) it might help them unseat Android too.

I really, really hope they don't do this for Windows Phone because if they do, it will kill any development I had planned for WP. If I would have to deal with every separate hardware manufacturer there is no way I could do it as a single hobby-developer. Apple's and Google's stores both allow me to deal with one single entity for distributing apps which is exactly how I want it (and both companies are used to international devs as well).

I agree with you on that. However, I think there are 2 things MSFT can do to avoid that issue, and still give themselves a competitive edge (remember, they sell to the manufacturers).

1) The manufacturer's control is opt-out. I.e. You submit the app to a single point of entry, and it automatically populates all the stores (or the ones you choose, like Apple currently allows you to choose countries). The manufacturer can then go back and remove the ones they don't like (I don't expect many to do this). Alternatively, a manufacture can also require that no app can be added to their store, unless pre-approved by them. However, I don't expect anyone to choose this option, since it would give them all the additional costs and disadvantages of the iOS App Store, without any of the benefits.

2) The manufacturers greatest incentive is that MSFT splits earnings with them. They already set a precedent (paying the music industry money for each Zune) and it would be the best way for them to compete with Android, which is free, but more importantly, far more stable and mature.

Funny. I have found that the most capable IT worker was the self-educated enthusiastic amateur. I have found that many school trained, certified IT people have little ability to think outside the box and as such not very innovative in searching for solutions to IT problems.

Well, since this is just a lead at this point, we can immediately discard any comments relating to evolution vs. revolution and skip directly to the "mystery" portion of this article.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Surface, or a subset of its tech, integrated with Windows 8 in order to give way to revolution.

I mean, lets skip ahead about 4-8 years from now. Whats left? We can do everything on a pc. Windows 10 had better connect to my brain directly and take full control of my 6 senses or I'll be sadly disappointed MS.

A Windows App store? Unless the store only links to the actual SW provider, I would not touch it with a 10 foot pole: Microsoft has a history of opening and closing businesses, so I would foresee the Microdoft would go this way: 2011: Open the MSAppStore to sell SW on Windows Desktop 2013: Open the MSLiveStore to sell both Media and SW on Windows Desktops, Close MSAppStore 2015: Open LiveMuSicStore for portable application with Windows Portable Enhanced, live MSLiveStore in place with different licences 2017: Close the MSLiveStore, open the MyStore 2028: Get out of the Application Selling Business

If they do bring an app store, it'll probably only take Microsoft points.

You say this as a joke, but it's important to remember that Microsoft does have experience running an online software repository; that's what the Xbox Marketplace is. Let's hope the concerns about third-party repositories are dealt with, though...that's where the real power is. Imagine a firm which could offer its employees a collection of preapproved software they could install on their own, which would be easily managed by the IT department without any direct human intervention...now there's a real innovation.

Microsoft demands TPM modules in all PCs, activated on startup and locked to the default Windows install, and moves to turn PCs into the closed platform that Apple and MS established with smartphones. Apple follows suit with their App Store.

People who argue against this on Ars are called "freetards." Jailbreakers move in, but MS and Apple sic the Feds on them. The End.

Microsoft demands TPM modules in all PCs, activated on startup and locked to the default Windows install, and moves to turn PCs into the closed platform that Apple and MS established with smartphones. Apple follows suit with their App Store.

People who argue against this on Ars are called "freetards." Jailbreakers move in, but MS and Apple sic the Feds on them. The End.

There is a difference between a consumer device like a phone, and your desktop/laptop computer.

While I know many who would like their phones to be as "free" as their computers, I know many more who couldn't care less. What they want is their device to work well, and do their jobs for them. Kinda like their cars.

Also, the iPhone has been jailbroken for 3 years straight. I havent heard of Feds knocking on anyone's door for that.

I have a jailbroken and modded XBox ever since it was released. Again, no feds at my door yet.

And even if MS/Apple do something of the sort, you know what, the solution is really easy. I just need to put the damn phone down, or uninstall the OS on my PC, and replace it with a Linux based phone/PC (tons of alternatives there...Android, Symbian, Meego, on the phone side, and millions of flavors on the PC side). That is why I respect Stallman. He doesn't whine and moan at Apple/MS. He just refuses to use them, and advocates not using them. Something the "freetards" (your word, not mine) can learn from.

There is a difference between a consumer device like a phone, and your desktop/laptop computer.

Depends on how much of a control freak you are. Both I and Apple see it the same way, only they see it as theirs to control.

Quote:

While I know many who would like their phones to be as "free" as their computers, I know many more who couldn't care less. What they want is their device to work well, and do their jobs for them. Kinda like their cars.

Sure, but at the same time there's no real reason for lockdown except DRM-style purposes, which has been something of a holy grail for the media industries on PCs. I'm sure they love the closed platforms of consoles and phones, but they hate PCs.

Quote:

Also, the iPhone has been jailbroken for 3 years straight. I havent heard of Feds knocking on anyone's door for that.

So long as there are open options it doesn't serve them to lock down or pursue it.

Quote:

And even if MS/Apple do something of the sort, you know what, the solution is really easy. I just need to put the damn phone down, or uninstall the OS on my PC, and replace it with a Linux based phone/PC (tons of alternatives there...

Supposing, of course, it is still possible.

Quote:

Android, Symbian, Meego, on the phone side, and millions of flavors on the PC side). That is why I respect Stallman. He doesn't whine and moan at Apple/MS. He just refuses to use them, and advocates not using them.

Well I try to avoid using them as well. Stallman's thing is avoiding all proprietary software. The catch is that I don't really want to sit 10 years behind the times just so I can do what I want with my hardware.

Quote:

Something the "freetards" (your word, not mine) can learn from.

Oh, the first place I heard "freetard" was here on Ars, from a bunch of people whom I can only assume were trolling the Open Ended section.

But alas, I suppose cynicism and distrust of Microsoft and Apple is a bad thing, right?

mikiev wrote:

Quote:

However, it's probably fair to say that consumers and software vendors alike are now more attuned to the idea of having a centralized store for purchasing applications...

I have been amazed at how few people have rebelled against this, after the way so many people flamed the idea of "Trusted Computing" - just a few years ago.

It makes me wonder if there is a 2nd-coming of Palladium/Trusted Computing/TPM in our future?

So long as Microsoft allows custom apps and content, everything should be fine. Otherwise, Microsoft should be hit hard with anti-trust.

As for the masses, remember that they don't even know what DRM is nor how locked down so many devices are. Of course they will accept it - they are too ignorant not to. Or that's what firms that use DRM are hoping anyways; I hope that DRM is abolished.